Let's have a look at progressive politics in the U.S.

It would be an understatement to say that the U.S. is politically divided these days. It's a shame, but it's what we've got. I want to delve into the implications of what divisiveness means and its history. It's not a new topic, it had it's beginnings in the early years of the 20th century. But it has evolved and its effect on the country is much different today than it was early in the century. Modern progressivism in politics is a broad, evolving philosophy rooted in the idea that government should actively address social, economic and political inequalities, especially those created by or left unresolved by markets and existing institutions. It's not one single doctrine, but a family of ideas that tends to cluster around a few core principles. Progressives generally believe that left alone, systems like capitalism can produce large inequalities in wealth, opportunity, and power. Government isn't just a referee, it's an active participant. Meaning,government must regulate corporations, expand social safety nets, and intervene in markets when outcomes are seen as unjust. Modern progressives push for policies that reduce economic inequality and increase security through: - higher tqxes on the wealthy and corporations - stronger labor protections (unions, minimum wage increases) - expanded public programs (healthcare, education, childcare) In the U.S., figures like Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are often associated with this wing. With regard to social justice and civil rights, the emphasis is on equity, not just equality. There is focus on perceived systemic barriers tied to race, gender and class. There is support for policies addressing historical disavantage. And, of course, advocacy for LGBTQ+ rights, criminal justice reform, and voting access. This is where modern Progressivism differs from older liberalsim, it tends to see inequality as structural, not just individual. Progressives often support universal or near universal healthcare (e.g. "Medicare for all"), reduced or free college tuition, and student debt relief. The idea is that basic services shouldn't depend heavily on income. Climate change is central. They belive in aggressive emissions reductions. Government should invest in renewable energy, and pursue policies like the "Green New Deal." With repsect to Democracy and Political Reform, many progressives argue the system itself is unbalanced. There should be campaign finance reform, reducing the influence of money in politics. There should be expansion of voting rights and access. Gerrymandering should be ended, with extensive electoral reforms. Modern Progressivism traces back to the Progressive Era (late 1800's to early 1900's), with figures like Theodore Roosevelt pushing antitrust laws and reforms. But todays' version is more focused on identity and structural inequality. It is more skeptical of large corporations and more supportive of expansive federal programs. Inside of the progressive/ liberal party, the ideological alignment is not monolithic. There are ongoing debates as to how far should government go? Is equity compatible with merit-based systems? And are large-scale programs efficient or bloated? Within the Democratic Party, Progressives often differ from moderates on pace and scale. Modern Progressivism is about using public power to reshape outcomes, not just preserve rules. It is driven by the belief that fairness requires corrective action, not passive neutrality. Conservatives often look at progressive ideology as lacking good, old-fashioned "horse sense." This should be self-explanatory, but to be safe, let me explain. If it looks like socialsim, walks like socialism, and quacks like a socialism, then it's socialism. As the late, great Margaret Thatcher famously said, "Socialsim is fine until you run out of other people's money.

The Making of a Novel

The ‘indie’ class of authors are in some ways like the ‘starving artists’. Many of them produce some very good works but because they haven’t established a “name'“ in the business, many go unnoticed. I mean, there’s only so much room on the stage, right? Some of the household names produce some fantastic work, obviously, or they wouldn’t be household names. It’s a tough business to break into, it takes a helluva lot of work and a truckload of talent to go with it. Writing novels isn’t easy, even if you love writing. It may be a writer’s life’s passion, but if you don’t write something others are interested in reading, and if it doesn’t have an impact of some sort, well, then there’s that. Some may write for the recognition, the money, and the fame, but I dare say if that is a writer’s motivation then they’re writing for the wrong reasons. There are a lot of good writers out there who are not Aldus Huxleys, John Steinbecks, Ernest Hemingways, or Truman Capotes. And the point is, they’re not trying to be. They’re writing with a purpose. And the purpose is to tell a story, a story that will intrigue readers, to instill emotion, to make them feel like they were ‘there’. Like they could see, and feel what was happening. Like they could feel the pain, the agony, the joy, the relief just like the characters were feeling. These writers draw readers into the story, so they’re not just reading, they’re experiencing. When the last chapter’s read and the cover closed, they don’t merely think ‘that was a good story, entertaining.’ They feel a sense of satisfaction, of relief, pride, or perhaps, joy. The same feeling the characters were feeling at the end of the story. If a writer can achieve that, then an epic story has been written. Writing for me is a passion. Of course it is or I wouldn’t have spent the past fifteen years writing a long, encompassing novel that required hours upon hours of research. It’s gratifying. It’s rewarding more than most life experiences. And it creates a legacy few can claim. My most recent work, “Between the Whistle and the Gun” is a story of the Choctaw tribe of native Americans. This was a difficult time for them, they had been forced from their homeland in southern Mississippi to southeastern Oklahoma. Life in their new ‘forced’ homeland was nightmarish. There was abuse not only from the outlaws and marauders but from the government itself. But in spite of it all, they prevailed as a people and a nation with the help of a native son and a few other heroic figures. It’s a fictional story based on real people. People who prevailed through unmentionable hardship and are still a tribe, a culture, and a nation. Thank you, and I hope you enjoy the story. C. Clayton Lewis

Between the Whistle and the Gun, It's done...

I made a previous post about my soon-to-be published novel, "Between the Whistle and the Gun". Finally, after fifteen years it's done. The final publication steps took place over the past few days, it's now awaiting the publishers approval. Which is more a formality at this point than anything. Next week, it will be live (on sale) on Amazon, both in paperback and as an e-book. At the point it becomes available for sale, I'll post a link in my blog.

The 'fifteen years' is not a misprint. I started this book in 2011, shortly after finishing my first novel "The El Morro Connection." It was an on and off endeavor for a number of years, but since retiring in 2024 it became a full time job. The best job I've ever had, by the way and the boss is great. So many hours, so many late nights, so much research, and I don't regret a minute of it. Not everyone was cut out to be a writer, it's a lonely job. But for me it has been the most gratifying experience of my life. Writing the first novel was wonderful, it was fun. Finishing the second one was enriching, rewarding on a personal and professional level. I'm proud of it. If you read it, I'm quite sure you will understand why. 

The first novel was a thriller, simply because I enjoy reading the genre so much. I love the excitement, the suspense. This one is historical fiction. That's quite an arc, but let me explain. My wife is an American Indian. Listening to the stories of her grandparents experiences and the stories her grandmother told her of her parents and grandparents, was fascinating. As I listened to the many stories I knew that this could be the makings of a hard-to-put-down book. It is based on actual people, places and events from history. Some of the characters are based on some of her ancestors. Some of the characters are based on real people in American history. Most of the events are fictional. Put it all together and you have one helluva story. 

I wrote my first novel in about a year. Every bit of it came from my imagination. "Between the Whistle and the Gun" came from my imagination and a lot of historical, factual information. The amount of research was extensive, and time consuming. Much more-so than I ever imagined it would be. Through the fifteen years there were countless opportunities and temptations to give it up and get on with life. It would have been so easy. But I guess I was meant to be a writer. Because I kept at it. At some point, I have no idea when that was, I decided that giving up was not an option. This effort had a purpose. This novel was going to make it to the shelf, barring nothing less than my own demise. I'm happy to say it made it to the shelf, and I'm still vertical. Both of which are major accomplishments. 

"Between the Whistle and the Gun" will be available on Amazon sometime next week. If you are a reader, and I know most of you are, please check it out. You won't be disappointed...